Posted by
America Forever on Sunday, February 11, 2007 11:28:00 PM
..... The Democrats are Back
The Republicans in Congress blew it badly in the last several years by seemingly forgetting from whence they came -- they decided to spend our money with abandon as if it was theirs, failing to live by the Jeffersonian edict of less government, not understanding that we must be better than the other party in recognizing the limits of federal spending. And, they combined it with arrogance (the "bridge to nowhere" stands out as a shameful example) and corruption -- things the Democrats are better at and we should have left those fine arts to them to further develop and enshrine.
Well, it took just a few weeks for the Dems to show the Republicans what amateurs we were. Before I go any further, are the 100 hours over? If not, I apologize for criticizing them too quickly. All Dem excesses in the first 100 hours can be attributed to the "mandate" they got from the voters in November. By the way, that mandate included the one that allows them to stretch out the 100 hours of legislative activity over two months, sorry, correction, two years.
Nancy Pelosi surely deserves the larger jet to take her back and forth to Frisco. The same Nancy Pelosi whose party will try to stop us from riding in SUV's because they consume too much gas and screw up the environment. The larger jet will not affect global warming but your SUV does. This one qualifies for arrogance and corruption all in one act.
And, the spending will continue and grow -- and grow. The difference will be that the Dem spending is GOOD for the country even if it is more extreme and shameful than the Republican spending because the latter was meant to only benefit Halliburton. Dem spending is so blatantly aimed at their voter base that it isn't even funny. Let's buy the votes of the lower-income African-Americans and Hispanics even if we have to do so by keeping them from getting out of the cycle of poverty.
Which gets me to the first part of the "tax and spend" credo. The "tax" part.
The Dems really are seeming to believe their own press releases about their "mandate" in the November elections. And, they may be about to give an advantage to the hapless Republicans, who look like they couldn't pull out a victory on their own if they tried.
The Dems want to tax the high-income earners in this country -- the other America of John Edwards. Were it that simple!
Now, John Edwards clearly belongs to that other America and by a long shot. By and large, the people who make incomes of $200,000 to $500,000 are just trying (mostly, in vain) to get to be as rich as John Edwards or John (Teresa Heinz) Kerry or Ted Kennedy. And, guess who's trying to prevent that from happening? Sorry, no prizes for guessing John Edwards, John Kerry or Ted Kennedy. I wonder if they think that to tax these "high-income earners" is a neat way to pull back the plank now that they've made it to the castle? And, talking of castles, how many of the people who make incomes of $200,000 to $500,000 can afford a "castle" like the 28,000 sq. ft. one that the Edwardses have built for themselves?
Now, I have a concept that should shut up the Dems from raiding the pocketbooks of the "high-income earners" who make less than $1,000,000 in a year. First, if we were to exempt this group from the Democrat tax, there just wouldn't be enough taxable income above that level to make up for it. Someone can do the math, but I'm guessing that way less than half the annual income made by people making over $200,000 is made by people making over $1,000,000. So, we have to go after the Edwardses, the Heinz-Kerrys and the Kennedys some other way.
Let's say that the average working stiff who makes $200,000 to $1,000,000 a year has a net worth of about $10,000,000. I'm sure that figure isn't far off the mark (although I'm just guessing). How about if we impose a 20% tax annually on wealth in excess of $10,000,000? Wouldn't that fill up the federal coffers really fast? And, you wouldn't have to worry about John Edwards using every dodge in the book to keep his taxable income down. It wouldn't matter, he'd be paying tax on his net worth of, I'm guessing again, $200,000,000.
Of course, such a tax would be un-American but so is taxing the "high-income earners!" But, if Ted Kennedy and company bought into my tax plan, at least their credibility on the subject would shoot up! Ain't going to happen and not because it's un-American. It ain't going to happen because the Dems like to tax the working stiffs, admittedly the higher-paid working stiffs, and they want to leave the gentlemen of leisure (i.e., themselves) alone.
Let the "tax and spend" games begin.